S.K.CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment, we dispose of two appeals, namely, R.F.A. No 273 and R. F. A. No 295 of 1986 - The first appeal has been filed by the claimant against the award dated 28 -6 -1986 passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla in Land Reference No 15 -S/4 of 1984 and the second appeal has been filed by the State through Collector against the said award

(2.) By Notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (shortly called as ˜the Act) on 31 -3 -1977, which was published in the Gazette on 29 -4 -1977, the land measuring 2486 Sq. yards and 8 Sq, feet alongwith the building having built up area of 259.4 Sq. yards belonging to the claimant was notified for acquisition for -a public purpose, namely, construction of headquarter of the Deepak Project. The Collector assessed the value of the land at Rs 25 per Sq yard and for the building, the compensation assessed was Rs. 1,95,452 The Collector also awarded a sum of Rs 814.38 paise for fruit trees and Rs. 9,945 for non -fruit trees Being dis -satisfied, the claimant prayed for a reference to the Land Acquisition Judge under section 18 of the Act By the impugned award, the learned Land Acquisition Judge after taking info consideration the entire evidence on record, increased the price of the land to Rs 60 per Sq. yard and for the building, a sum of Rs. 2,50,000 was fixed as compensation. The learned Land Acquisition Judge dis -allowed the prayer for compensation for fruit as well as non -fruit trees. In addition, solatium at the rate of 30% was also awarded. It was further directed that the claimant -appellant shall be entitled to get interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of taking possession of the land and building in question and that if the amount is not paid within a period of one year, the claimant shall be entitled to get interest at the rate of 15% per annum. Hence, the present two appeals.

(3.) Heard Mr K.D. Sood alongwith Mr. Bhupender Gupta, learned Counsel for the claimant -appellant and Pt. Om Parkash Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, for the Collector.